China Digital Times (CDT) » murdershttp://chinadigitaltimes.net
Covering China from CyberspaceTue, 03 Mar 2015 16:27:35 +0000en-UShourly1China Digital Timeshttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/wp-content/themes/cdt/images/feedlogo.pnghttp://chinadigitaltimes.net
Fujian Death Row Inmate in Hiding After Acquittalhttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2014/08/fujian-death-row-inmate-hiding-acquittal/
http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2014/08/fujian-death-row-inmate-hiding-acquittal/#commentsFri, 22 Aug 2014 21:51:01 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=176528The New York Times’ Chris Buckley reports on the acquittal and release of Nian Bin, who was sentenced to death in 2007 for killing two children.

Mr. Nian maintained that he had confessed to the crime of “placing dangerous materials” — poisons — only under searing torture after his arrest. But it took a first trial, three appeals, three retrials and a review by China’s highest court before judges in Fujian Province acquitted him after concluding that the evidence marshaled by prosecutors was fatally marred by flaws and inconsistencies.

[…] Mr. Nian’s case illustrated how reluctant judges, prosecutors and the police can be to admit error. The problem is by no means unique to China, but lawyers there said political pressures on the legal system make it all the harder for unjust verdicts to be overturned.

“Throughout this trial process, the lawyers could clearly feel the pressure from inside and outside the system,” Mr. Nian’s lawyers, led by Zhang Yansheng, said in a statement issued after his release. [Source]

“This rare acquittal is yet another vivid example of why the death penalty should be abolished, and the ever present risk of executing innocent people is just one of many compelling arguments against the death penalty,” said Anu Kultalahti, Amnesty International’s China Researcher.

[…] “In this case, China’s system of Supreme People’s Court review of all death sentences eventually prevented a miscarriage of justice. But Nian Bin and his family would not have had to endure such a lengthy process of retrials and appeals if the Fuzhou court had seriously considered the higher courts’ repeated rulings that there was insufficient evidence against him,” Kultalahti said. [Source]

While Nian is now free, South China Morning Post’s Patrick Boehler reports that he has gone into hiding with his family, while investigation of his wrongful conviction and alleged abuse seems unlikely:

Zhang Yansheng, who along with Si Weijiang led Nian’s defence, said on Friday afternoon she has been unable to reach the family ever since they drove away from the court house in Fuzhou to avoid the media frenzy and the children’s family, who have opposed his release.

“They don’t dare to return home,” she said. “Their home had been ransacked by the children’s relatives. [The family] still believes he killed the children.”

[…] Lawyer Zhang said she did not expect anyone would now look into the torture allegations or the police investigation that led to Nian’s arrest and conviction. “The courts cannot handle such matters, it would have to be a police investigation,” she said. “They are not going to slap themselves in the face.” [Source]

]]>http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2014/08/fujian-death-row-inmate-hiding-acquittal/feed/0State-Appointed Muslim Leader Killed in Xinjianghttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2014/07/state-appointed-muslim-leader-killed-xinjiang/
http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2014/07/state-appointed-muslim-leader-killed-xinjiang/#commentsThu, 31 Jul 2014 20:13:40 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=175780Xinhua reports that police in Kashgar, Xinjiang, have shot dead two and captured a third suspect in the murder of Jume Tahir, vice-president of the Beijing-sanctioned Islamic Association of China:

The killings and arrest happened as the suspects resisted arrest with knives and axes at noon on Wednesday, according to the authorities.

Turghun Tursun, Memetjan Remutillan and Nurmemet Abidilimit were wanted over the murder of Jume Tahir, imam of China’s largest mosque, the Id Kah Mosque in the city of Kashgar.

The 74-year-old, who enjoyed a high reputation among Muslims nationwide, was killed at 6:58 a.m. on Wednesday after he finished hosting the morning ritual.

According to police, the three suspects, influenced by religious extremism, planned to “do something big” to increase their influence. [Source]

Tahir, 74, had led the 600-year-old Id Kah mosque in the city of Kashgar since 2003 and was a strong supporter of government policy on Islam that critics say imposes harsh restrictions on Muslims.

[…] Tahir’s high-profile support for the government — the report referred to him as a “patriotic religious personage” — and his criticism of violence in Xinjiang likely made him a target of the militants, whom the government says have ties to overseas Islamic terror groups.

[…] Tahir was frequently quoted in state media echoing government statements that Xinjiang was free of ethnic tensions and that “hostile forces in and outside China” were responsible for stirring up trouble.

“The people of all ethnic groups in Xinjiang are enjoying more and more rights and interests economically or politically,” he told state television during the 2010 session of the congress.

Tahir was seen as backing bans on the wearing of beards and headscarves by young Uighurs, as well as restrictions on mosque attendance and fasting. […] [Source]

While working on a report for AFP, Tom Hancock surveyed the spokesman for the DC-based World Uyghur Congress on the killing of Jume Tahir:

Depressing. Asked World Uighur Congress spokesman Dilxat Raxit if he would condemn the reported murder of a Kasghar Imam. He did not do so.

Defence lawyer Li Fangping said prosecutors ignored written and verbal requests for court material and had not notified lawyers or family when the case was turned over to the court.

“They have not given us any formal response and they have not heard our legal defence opinions. They directly sent it to the Urumqi Intermediate Court. This is fundamentally a violation of law,” Li told Reuters.

[…] Li said if the court moved quickly, the case could be heard some time in August and it was unclear if he would be allowed to attend.

[…] “The decision to indict on such a serious charge a man like Ilham Tohti, who is known for trying to bridge divides, shows how far China’s human rights have deteriorated in the past months,” Sophie Richardson, China director at Human Rights Watch, said in an emailed statement.

“It sends precisely the wrong signal to Uighurs when tensions are at an all-time high.” [Source]

A statement on the official website of Tibetan Buddhist leader the Karmapa Lama said he was “shocked” by the news and offered his condolences to his family members and everyone at the monastery.

“I hope that all of his visions and aspirations may continue to be fulfilled,” he added.

A statement posted by Lama Yeshe Rinpoche said: “To all dear friends of Samye Ling and Choje Akong Rinpoche, I am very, very sorry to inform you all that tragically, my brother Choje Akong Rinpoche, my nephew and one monk who was travelling with then, were all assassinated in Chengdu today.”[Source]

Unfortunately I used the word “assassination” in respect of the killing of my brother Akong Rinpoche. English is not my first language and I did not appreciate that the word means killing with a religious or political motive. I never intended to imply that there was such a motive and I regret the misunderstanding that has been caused.

Akong fled from Tibet into India in 1959, following the Chinese occupation of the country. But in recent years he had established unusually good relations with the Chinese government, and was able to travel in the country supervising schools and medical programmes that had been established by his charity The ROKPA Foundation. He was on a visit to these projects when he was killed.

Akong had played a key part in one of the most controversial episodes in Tibetan Buddhism in recent years In 1992, he led the search party that brought a seven-year-old boy Apo Gaga from his home in a nomad’s tent in Eastern Tibet to Tsurphu monastery, near Lhasa, where with the permission of the Chinese authorites, he was enthroned as the 17th Karmapa, Urgyen Trinley Dorje – the second most important figure after the Dalai Lama in the Tibetan Buddhist hierarchy.

In 2000, at the age of 14, the Karmapa escaped from Tibet into India, when it became apparent the Chinese would not allow him to receive his lineage teachings and had designs to use him as a political “puppet”.[Source]

Akong Tulku has been my friend from the time I was seven. A social activist, he showed great kindness to Tibet by founding schools and hospitals, printing old texts, and helping many people. Thus I am shocked to hear that he along with two others has been taken from us so suddenly. I would like to offer my condolences to his family members, everyone at Samye Ling Monastery, the Rokpa Foundation, and all the persons involved in his projects in Tibet as well as to all of the students whose lives he touched. I hope that all of his visions and aspirations may continue to be fulfilled.[Source]

“I cannot stand my name being mixed up with an academic body that presents such ridiculous and irresponsible forensic evidence,” she said.

“I am also resolved to quit the forensic system in China. As a forensic doctor in the supreme forensic monitoring apparatus, I am extremely disappointed and and have become even desperate over what is happening.

“After painstakingly working in this field for thirty years, I have realised that I do not have the ability by myself to change the situation. I cannot rectify the cases which were unjustly and immorally tried even at the cost of my life. My only option is to quit. For my innocence in the future, I must quit,” she said. [Source]

In a video posted online, she said she felt “disappointed” with the professional conduct of the mainland’s forensic medical community but felt obliged to step down as she “could not change the current situation”.

In 2010, Ma Yue, a 20-year-old university student, fell to his death from the platform of Beijing’s Gulou Dajie subway station. Ma’s mother, Meng Zhaohong, was unhappy with the inquest’s findings that her son had “died of abrupt termination of breath and heartbeat from a high-pressure electric shock”, without providing additional information.

[…] Wang, a forensic scientist with the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, said the forensic conclusion given by the association in Ma’s case was “ridiculous and irresponsible”.

Wang said in her video that, although she had no access to evidence presented by the police, her years of experience convinced her that the cause of Ma’s death was not the same as the authorities claimed. Wang did not return phone calls yesterday. [Source]

Wang, 57, wrote after Gu’s conviction for murdering Heywood last September that there was a “serious lack of evidence” and said she was “very pained, upset and scared” that the court had believed Heywood was poisoned with cyanide.

She told the Guardian at the time that she had “fulfilled my historical responsibility” by casting doubt on the decision. She subsequently said she had been trying to leave her post with the procuratorate for some years.

Bo is accused of bribery, corruption and abuse of power. The English edition of the state-run Global Times newspaper cited a source close to Bo as saying the last charge related to Bo’s attempts to prevent his former police chief Wang Lijun from reinvestigating Heywood’s death and his decision to illegally remove Wang from his post.

[…] The Wall Street Journal has reported that Gu may give evidence against her husband. Chinese court cases tend to rely on written testimony rather than on bringing witnesses to testify in court. [Source]

]]>http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/08/forensic-scientist-quits-days-ahead-of-bo-xilai/feed/0Death Sentence for “Faking” Wife’s Self-Immolationhttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/08/man-sentenced-to-death-for-faking-wifes-self-immolation/
http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/08/man-sentenced-to-death-for-faking-wifes-self-immolation/#commentsSat, 17 Aug 2013 03:05:53 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=161628A Sichuan court sentenced 32-year-old Drolma Gya to death and deprivation of political rights on Thursday after convicting him of murdering his wife Kunchok Wangmo and disguising her death as a self-immolation. From Xinhua:

Drolma Gya had promised to quit drinking but was caught drinking by his wife that night, according to the court.

His wife pretended to strangle herself with a scarf during an ensuing argument, at which point Drolmya Gya grabbed the scarf and told her “if you have suffered this much, I will help you to end it” before strangling her to death, according to the court.

He then took the body outside, doused it with gasoline and set it alight at 2 a.m. the following morning, the court said.

[…] He said he did not expect such severe consequences for burning his wife’s body, adding that he acted due to a sudden impulse and had immediate regrets.

The honest truth? Maybe five hours. I tripped over the phrase “dead pig collector” in a Foreign Policy story about pollution in China, and the whole idea occurred to me. Then it was just a case of getting on yet another PRISM watchlist by doing online searches for people talking about getting rid of bodies. Which was very easy to find. And then maybe ten minutes when I had the notion that the Chinese, of all people on Earth, must have invented a cellphone with a built-in cigarette lighter. Which of course they had. And then it was just four days of writing—the whole thing, as I say, was in my head, and it was just a case of getting it out. [Source]

]]>http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/08/warren-ellis-on-pig-disposal-and-chinese-innovation/feed/0Chinese Workers Found Dead in Kabulhttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/08/chinese-workers-found-dead-in-kabul/
http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/08/chinese-workers-found-dead-in-kabul/#commentsFri, 09 Aug 2013 23:08:43 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=161269China has urged the Afghan government to protect Chinese citizens after three were found dead in a Kabul apartment on Friday. The Chinese embassy says they are believed to have been targeted because of their nationality, though local police dispute this. From Sharifullah Sahak and Azam Ahmed at The New York Times:

The head of criminal investigations for the Kabul police, Gen. Mohammad Zahir, said that the bodies were discovered Friday morning but that it was unclear when they were killed. He added that he believed that the women were sex workers and that the deaths did not appear to be politically motivated. Two other Chinese living in the apartment are missing, he said.

[…] Still, there was no evidence that the Chinese workers killed in the attack were involved in the sex trade. […]

[…] For China, the deaths are a sad reminder of the instability on its doorstep if security in Afghanistan deteriorates. Since last year, the Chinese government has signaled that it is paying greater attention to Afghanistan ahead of the withdrawal of NATO forces in 2014. While the country shares only a sliver of a border with Afghanistan, officials in Beijing worry about risks to broader regional stability that could ripple into Xinjiang, a western region of China where the largely Muslim Uighur population has chafed at Communist Party controls. [Source]

]]>http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/08/chinese-workers-found-dead-in-kabul/feed/0The Last Straw for Trust in China’s Courts?http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/07/the-last-straw-for-trust-in-chinas-courts/
http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/07/the-last-straw-for-trust-in-chinas-courts/#commentsTue, 09 Jul 2013 21:46:11 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=159339At The Atlantic, Jiabao Du explains how a rape and murder trial in Hebei shows a deep lack of faith in China’s courts following a string of high-profile wrongful convictions. Wang Shujin was sentenced to death in 2007 for raping and killing three women. He insists that he is also guilty in a fourth case for which another man, Nie Shubin, was executed in 1995. The courts argue that Wang is simply maneuvering for a lighter sentence, and claim that his story has a number of flaws, but critics from prominent legal scholars to ordinary weibo users have lined up to attack them.

The courts have repeatedly dismissed Wang’s confession and invalidated his appeals upon a finding that Wang’s descriptions of what he said he did deviated significantly from crucial evidence found at the crime scene. The official Sina microblog of the Hebei Provincial High Court listed the contradictions: “1. The neck of the victim was tangled with a floral shirt and Wang Shujin did not mention that in his confession. 2. The victim was smothered while Wang Shujin said he strangled and trampled her to death. 3. The times of murder do not match. 4. The heights of the victim do not match either.”

[…] Even the criminal Wang Shujin, convicted of killing and raping three other women, seemed to be more popular among people than the Hebei court that was determined to affirm his innocence. A popular Weibo user named Writer Tianyou hailed Wang Shujin as a warrior fighting for the reputation of an executed man he never met, while describing the prosecutors as devils. [Source]

]]>http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/07/the-last-straw-for-trust-in-chinas-courts/feed/0CCTV Pre-Execution Spectacle Polarizes Viewershttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/03/cctv-pre-execution-spectacle-polarizes-viewers/
http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/03/cctv-pre-execution-spectacle-polarizes-viewers/#commentsSat, 02 Mar 2013 01:50:29 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=152207Drug lord Naw Kham and three other foreigners were executed in Kunming on Friday for the 2011 killings of 13 Chinese sailors on the Mekong River. State broadcaster CCTV aired the prisoners’ final hours, together with segments on their crimes and the ensuing manhunt, as a showcase of tough justice, but some saw instead a sinister and possibly illegal echo of the Mao era. From Jonathan Kaiman at The Guardian:

Naw Kham’s wry smile belied his macabre circumstances. “I haven’t been able to sleep for two days. I have been thinking too much. I miss my mum. I don’t want my children to be like me,” the 44-year-old Burmese druglord, chained to a chair, told a Chinese TV interviewer.

On Friday – two days after the interview – the Burmese freshwater pirate was executed for allegedly murdering a crew of Chinese sailors on the Mekong river in October, 2011. His last moments were aired on state television.

In the two-hour live broadcast, black-clad police officers hauled Naw Kham from a detention centre in southern China, bound him with ropes and chains, and bundled him on to a bus bound for the execution site. Three of his alleged henchmen followed in similar fashion. They were each killed – off camera – by lethal injection.

“Rather than showcasing rule of law, the program displayed state control over human life in a manner designed to attract gawkers,” Han Youyi, a criminal law professor, wrote via microblog. “State-administered violence is no loftier than criminal violence.”

[…] In one segment, Liu Yuejin, director general of the central government’s Narcotics Control Bureau, cast the executions as a pivotal moment for a newly confident China and for ethnic Chinese across the globe. “In the past, overseas Chinese dared not say they were of Chinese origin,” said Mr. Liu, who led the task force that spent six months hunting the culprits. “Now they can hold their heads high and be themselves.”

Supporters of the program were many, and enthusiastic. One blogger suggested that death by lethal injection was too lenient, adding “These beasts should be pulled apart by vehicles.”

Some critics said the broadcast, and the subsequent public gloating, displayed an ugly side of China and would hurt its image abroad. To Murong Xuecun, a well-known Chinese author, the program revealed a national psyche, fed by decades of Communist Party propaganda, that craves vengeance for the years of humiliation by foreigners. “It proves that hatred-education still has a market in China,” he said in an interview.

[…] Over the last two years the Chinese government has found itself embroiled in increasingly dangerous sovereignty disputes with its Southeast Asian and Japanese neighbors. So far, diplomacy has been the preferred course of action. Yet on China’s decidedly nationalistic and highly influential microblogging platforms, diplomacy — especially on sovereignty issues — is unpopular and viewed as a sign of weakness.

In response, the Chinese government and its official media tribunals have carefully ratcheted up the aggressive rhetoric, especially toward Japan, since the fall of 2012, reminding Chinese that they will not be bullied by outside forces. Rather, if there will be any bullying, China will be doing it.

A 2012 Reuters investigation into the Mekong murders described the web of trafficking in drugs, humans and endangered animals in Southeast Asia’s “Golden Triangle”, and Naw Kham’s legendary or perhaps mythical place in it. The report also highlighted the possible involvement of an elite Thai anti-drugs unit in the killings.

We’ve learned a hard lesson in Chongqing at the cost of both lives and blood.

[…] If I was to describe how they acted in Chongqing over these past few years, I’d say they were like a crazy mouse on a rollercoaster going to a slippery slide. The newly-appointed leaders of the city’s public security apparatus are strongly opposed to the way that former party chief Bo Xilai and former head of the Public Security Bureau Wang Lijun handled matters in the past.

Now many just causes are gradually being rehabilitated.

But how many people were actually detained during the crackdown? How many were prosecuted? How many were sentenced to death or re-education through labor … we need to be clear on these numbers. We have a duty to history and to the people.

[…] If we don’t reveal what really went on, if we don’t expose their crimes and terrible deeds, many ordinary people will remain in the dark and we will be on the wrong side of history.

After two years of observation and deep thought, I believe that the underlying social foundations that led to the tragedy that occurred in Chongqing, continue to exist and flourish in China today. If we don’t seriously reflect on what happened in Chongqing, the soil which cultivated the tragedy in Chongqing will continue to exist, and if it doesn’t happen in Chongqing again, it just might take place somewhere else.

[…] If Wang Lijun hadn’t defected to the U.S. embassy and set off a series of other problems, it’s likely the Chongqing Model would have been copied across the country. If that happened, what would China’s rule of law be like? The more we think about it, the more we still feel have fears even after the events in Chongqing.

[…] In fact, the Chongqing’s problems are national problems that were concentrated and exposed in one municipality. It showed us the serious consequences of not continuing to deepen reform and also the great possibility and danger of the extreme-left making a comeback.

As a forensics examiner in the supreme legal supervisory body of a great country that accounts for one-fifth of the world’s population, my life’s value at this point in time consists in resolutely examining and raising questions about possibly incorrect causes of death that fall within the scope of my official duties. It consists in snuffing out human errors that could result in disastrous desecration of the souls of dead men and in being a sanitation worker who does her utmost to quickly clean away the spiritual trash that pollutes people’s hearts and sullies social morals.

…No individual, no group, no organization can use me, Wang Xuemei, to speak the lies they want to speak or commit the sins they want to commit, because I’m a professional who is deeply loyal to the souls of the dead and who acts in accordance with what Heaven decrees.

]]>http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2012/09/forensic-expert-explains-challenge-to-heywood-story/feed/1Gu Kailai Found Guilty of Heywood Killinghttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2012/08/gu-kailai-found-guilty-of-heywood-killing/
http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2012/08/gu-kailai-found-guilty-of-heywood-killing/#commentsMon, 20 Aug 2012 13:01:33 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=141999Gu Kailai, wife of deposed Chongqing Party chief Bo Xilai, and family aide Zhang Xiaojun were declared guilty on Monday of the intentional homicide of British businessman Neil Heywood. Zhang was sentenced to nine years for his lesser role in the killing, while Gu received a suspended death sentence which, like that of former business tycoon Wu Ying, will likely be commuted to life imprisonment. From Andrew Jacobs at The New York Times:

The verdict and sentence appear to wrap up one of the more lurid chapters of a sweeping scandal that brought down Ms. Gu’s husband, Bo Xilai, and challenged the Communist Party during a politically delicate, once-a-decade leadership transition that is set to culminate in the fall.

[…] Shortly after the verdict, Tang Yigan, deputy director of the Hefei Intermediate People’s Court in Anhui Province, told reporters that the court weighed Ms. Gu’s confession, her testimony that implicated others and the litany of psychological problems she is reported to have suffered. In the end, however, he said Mr. Heywood’s threats in no way justified her crimes.

[…] Legal analysts and political experts said Ms. Gu’s suspended death sentence was most likely calibrated to satisfy the Chinese public and the British government, but also supporters of Mr. Bo, who remains a darling among leftists and certain factions of the leadership enamored of his zealous campaign against organized crime and his efforts to address some of the income disparities that have accompanied three decades of free-market reform.

Gu Kailai has been sentenced to death with a two-year suspension. Under Art. 50 of the Criminal Law, if she commits no new intentional crimes while in prison, that sentence will be commuted after two years to life imprisonment. It can even be commuted to 25 years’ imprisonment if she “genuinely demonstrates major merit” (确有重大立功表现). And further reductions are possible after the initial commutation.

Under Art. 78 of the Criminal Law and a 2011 Supreme People’s Court directive, those sentenced to life imprisonment or a term of years (including as a result of a commuted death sentence) may have their sentences reduced for good behavior (that’s my own term; Chinese law speaks of showing repentance or establishing merit) during their imprisonment. And various forms of good behavior are listed, including (in the 2011 SPC directive) paying compensation. Presumably that will not be a problem for Gu.

While censors appeared to be holding back in the first few hours after the verdict was reported, not all comments were allowed to stand. “A suspended death sentence isn’t surprising at all,” one Sina Weibo user wrote in a post that was quickly deleted. “From Jiang Qing to today, what government official’s family member has been given an actual death sentence for committing a serious crime? It’s an unspoken rule!”

And although cynicism dominated the early reactions, a handful of users tried to cast the verdict in a positive light — as a development that might help turn public opinion against capital punishment.

“It is extremely necessary for China to get rid of the death penalty,” argued on Sina Weibo user posting under the name Ke Luomu. “Capital punishment is the only service prepared exclusively for regular people.”

According to WSJ Chinese editor Li Yuan, however, the verdict’s moment in the Weibo spotlight quickly passed:

Weiboers have moved on from GKL verdict. They probably don’t really care. Now the focus is Myanmar ending censorship. When will it be China?

“In the testimony, Bo Guagua asserted he didn’t meet Heywood and did not engage in anything with Heywood in recent years,” the person said.

[…] The assertions attributed to Gu’s son — who was studying until recently at Harvard University — cast doubts on the official narrative pushed by court officials and state-run media throughout Gu’s trial.

Court officials said Gu killed Heywood because he sent her son an email threatening him over business differences.

The next step toward concluding the scandal is widely expected to be the trial of Mr. Wang [Lijun], most likely on treason charges related to what authorities have called his “unauthorized” consulate visit. Mr. Wang, who was detained by Chinese security officers and placed under investigation after leaving the consulate, stepped down in June as a member of the national Parliament—a resignation that stripped him of immunity from prosecution.

Mr. Bo, however, is still a member both of the national Parliament and of the party—official exclusion from which is usually a necessary precursor to criminal charges, according to experts on Chinese politics and law.

[…] If Mr. Bo is dealt with internally by the party, a final decision on his fate could be announced by the autumn, but if he is turned over to the courts, many observers do not expect a trial until next year at the earliest.

]]>http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2012/08/gu-kailai-found-guilty-of-heywood-killing/feed/0Verdict in Heywood Murder Trial Due Mondayhttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2012/08/verdict-in-heywood-murder-trial-due-monday/
http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2012/08/verdict-in-heywood-murder-trial-due-monday/#commentsFri, 17 Aug 2012 22:48:35 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=141893The verdict in Gu Kailai’s trial for the murder of Neil Heywood is to be announced on Monday, according to Reuters:

“The verdicts for Gu Kailai and Zhang Xiaojun will be announced at 9 a.m. on Monday,” an official with the Hefei Intermediate People’s Court told Reuters.

[…] Chinese courts usually deliver verdicts and sentences at the same hearing, and Gu and Zhang could receive the death penalty.

But lawyers have said Gu is likely to receive a long prison term, possibly life, because government accounts of the case have stressed she was seeking to protect her son, Bo Guagua, who was until recently a student at Harvard University.

[… M]ost China-watchers assume that proceedings in this case have been tightly controlled to ensure that only the officially approved narrative emerges. They assume that the verdict was decided in Beijing before the opening gavel sounded, and that the proceedings were merely a performance for the benefit of the public, a kind of judicial Shakespeare-in-the-park, but without the drama.

That’s the conventional wisdom. And at times like this, it’s the job of the think-outside-the-box expert to explain why the conventional wisdom is wrong. But it’s not. In fact, the trial is as predictable as it is banal. If anything is surprising, it’s the degree to which it utterly fails to upset our assumptions about how Chinese politics and the legal system work.

[…] The real lesson in this case, then, is twofold. First, it offers us no reason to change our understanding of the Chinese legal system as directly subservient to politics when sufficiently powerful politicians choose to get involved. Second, it reflects the cynicism that seems so pervasive in Chinese society. Nobody I know, Chinese or foreign, with the remotest knowledge of the Chinese legal system thinks that anything of importance will be decided as a result of what went on at the Gu trial.

Zheng Xiaoyan, a deputy to the National People’s Congress who attended the court hearing, said the public intentional homicide trial of Bogu Kailai and Zhang indicates that China is a socialist country governed by law. The dignity and authority of the law brook no violation.

[…] Zheng said everyone is equal before the law, so nobody is entitled to any privilege. The binding force of the law does not have exceptions. Any one who breaks the law must be severely punished.

“This case has drawn great attention from the public,” said Jiang Tao, a local resident from the Yaohai District of Hefei. “I attended the full hearing and felt the solemnness of the court and inviolability of the law.”

“The public trial shows that everyone is equal before the law. I hope that the court will make a fair judgement in accordance with the law,” Jiang Tao said.

Because it wasn’t permitted to bring any recording equipment into the courtroom, even a small pencil I had with me was confiscated. I can only rely on memory and inference to sum up the case, and this account includes subjective inferences I’ve made from the details of various pieces of testimony. If there are mistakes, omissions, or additions, don’t blame me.

[…] I feel that the entire courtroom adjudication process was fairly objective and just. There was a slight feeling that things had been rehearsed beforehand. But that didn’t affect the ultimate defining of the case. The facts really were clear and the evidence really was copious. The prosecutor didn’t bully people and the defence lawyers did everything they could. The testimony of the called witnesses (传唤证人的证词)[2] was very just and unbiased. To convict these two is absolutely just.

[…] I was fortunate enough to sit near Shen Zhigeng. Mr. Shen Zhigeng handled the defence in the Xiamen Yuanhua case several years ago, and this time the Bo family originally wanted him to be the defense attorney. But the lawyers had already been appointed by the judicial organs, and Mr. Shen could only attend as an observer. Shortly after the trial began, the lawyer had just begun to speak, and Shen sighed, “This case has been ruined by the lawyer.”

Who is Zhao Xiangcha, why was he allowed to attend the trial, and why did he feel it was fine to publish a report of the trial on line? This was a trial so sensitive that attendance was strictly controlled, and by Zhao’s own account even his pencil was confiscated. In 1980, Liu Qing was sentenced to prison for (among other things) distributing a transcript (not alleged to be inaccurate) of Wei Jingsheng’s supposedly public trial. Why was Zhao Xiangcha confident he could do this?

[…] This kind of trial is just a show to cover up the truth. If this kind of case is not tried justly, then lies have to be used to cover up lies, leading to an impossible situation where the story doesn’t hold together and it becomes a satire of justice.

In any case, as far as the bit of the iceberg that was exposed is concerned, we can see who the real mafia in Chongqing are.

At the trial, Bogu tried to emphasize that the motivation behind her crime was to protect her son. But these aren’t exculpatory circumstances, nor is there enough evidence to prove her claim.

If the dispute between Bogu and Heywood was economic in nature, they could have used economic channels or a civil lawsuit to resolve it. The fact that Heywood was willing to meet Bogu by himself and drink tea and liquor with her, indicates that Heywood was not on the verge of murdering her son. The dispute had not reached that level. It is obvious that her argument does not add up. In fact, last November as the case was unfolding, Bogu’s son was in the United States studying at Harvard University.

The facts about the disagreement between Bogu and Heywood are hard to come by, but what is known does not excuse her for her crime. The story spun about a mother sacrificing herself for her own can hardly deceive anyone.

Legal and political scholars say much of the case has been implausible, leaving major questions unanswered, not least of which is whether the victim posed any real threat to Gu’s son at all. Also, why would a high official’s wife carry out such a murder herself? Where is Bo Xilai, the alleged murderer’s husband and man at the center of the messiest scandal in two decades to rock the Chinese leadership?

[…] “It sounds like a story from a fairy tale. The details of the case have very little credibility,” Peking University law professor He Weifang said of the narrative via state media and official comments.

[… The University of Nottingham’s Steve] Tsang said he believes that the party leadership has drawn three political parameters around the case: first, that murder by a senior leader’s wife must be punished, though short of execution; second, that Bo Xilai’s case is unlikely to be resolved before the political transition; and third, that Bo Guagua is not to be implicated out of concern that other party leaders’ overseas children might someday be dragged into political affairs back home.

“If you accept that these are the basic political parameters first and the script was subsequently written to make it work, then you see how the script becomes eventually what it looks like and how it can’t actually really be a consistent narrative,” he said.

Some observers present at the trial also questioned whether an email presented in court, allegedly from Mr. Heywood, had explicitly threatened to “destroy” Bo Guagua if he did not pay the £13 million, as some media accounts of the trial have suggested.

[…] The precise wording of the alleged email, as well as other details of the proceedings, are hard to pin down because none of the observers in court were permitted to record the proceedings or to take any notes.

[…] There is further confusion over when Ms. Gu and Mr. Heywood first met: Xinhua said 2005, while an unofficial account [referring to Zhao’s] of the trial circulating online, most details of which were confirmed by the observers who were present in the courtroom, said the year was 2003.

Several of Mr. Heywood’s friends said both dates were inaccurate and that Mr. Heywood got to know the Bo family in the mid-1990s while living in the northeastern city of Dalian, where Mr. Bo was mayor at the time. They also said he helped make arrangements for Bo Guagua’s education in Britain when he moved there around 2000.

Wright told how in 2001 Heywood was nearly murdered at the couple’s penthouse flat in Keystone House, Bournemouth. Henchmen were sent from China after a “spy” posing as a cook exposed the affair, he says.

“Just before Christmas three Chinese guys turned up at their flat which I was guarding with a team 24 hours a day. One of them was 6ft 3in, powerfully-built and seemed to be in charge.

[…] “Mrs Gu and her son were upstairs along with Heywood, watching the fight.

“It was brutal. Those guys wanted blood. Eventually we got the better of them and they didn’t want the British police turning up so they jumped in a car and sped off.“

[…] I would suggest that the process that has just taken place under the watchful but circumscribed eye of the Chinese and international media could better be dubbed as a ‘ritualistic ceremony’. That is, it was an orchestrated event sanctifying the consensus regarding Neil Heywood’s death, one that has been used to divine the mysterious workings of power. Of course, every ceremony requires a liturgy, and in the case of the BoGu Kailai trial everyone has dutifully fulfilled their liturgical responsibilities.

[…] The law and due process are not really the point. The moment people agreed to treat this process as a trial, a legal event, they shared unwittingly in the consensus view about Neil Heywood’s murder. The arguments will continue, but each and every one – including the view expressed in this essay – will unfold within the safe, predetermined boundaries of an official scripted liturgical ritual.

Two men accused of fatally shooting a pair of Chinese graduate students at the University of Southern California were charged on Tuesday with capital murder, making them eligible to face the death penalty if convicted, prosecutors said ….

The men arrested in the case, 20-year-old Bryan Barnes and 19-year-old Javier Bolden, have been charged with capital murder during a suspected robbery. Prosecutors have not yet decided whether to seek the death penalty or life in prison, both options in a capital case, the district attorney’s office said.

The two will face the charges when they appear in a Los Angeles court later on Tuesday afternoon.

Their attorney, Alan Burton Newman, alleges in the lawsuit that USC inaccurately claimed on its website that it “is ranked among the safest of U.S. universities and colleges, with one of the most comprehensive, proactive campus and community safety programs in the nation.” The suit notes that USC says it provides 24-hour security on campus and in surrounding neighborhoods.

The suit says USC “provided no patrolling” in the neighborhood where the shooting occurred. After the killings, USC persisted with a “clearly misleading” portrayal of safety, reiterating in a letter to the campus community that crime “is low compared to other areas of Los Angeles,” according to the lawsuit.

In response, USC attorney Debra Wong Yang said the university is “deeply saddened by this tragic event, which was a random violent act not representative of the safety of USC or the neighborhoods around campus. While we have deep sympathy for the victims’ families, this lawsuit is baseless and we will move to have it dismissed.”

Stan Abrams, commenting on the case at China Hearsay, agreed, concluding that whatever precautions are taken, “these things just happen.”